Democrats Fear Historic Midterm Defeat As CNN Says 80 Year RECORD Polls For GOP Signal Midterm BLOWOUT, Gas Nears $10 In CA
Democrats Fear Historic Midterm Defeat As CNN Says 80 Year RECORD Polls For GOP Signal Midterm BLOWOUT, Gas Nears $10 In CA. In 10 states and DC gas prices are over $5 per gallon signaling economic crisis.
Joe Biden is out here saying we are experience a robust recovery while gas prices skyrocket and inflation is at record levels. Meanwhile corporate press argues Democrats losing in the midterms is actually a good thing and it will help them win in 2024.
Polling for the GOP has not been this good in generations and the prediction is a red wave in novermber midterms.
But a lot can change from now until then
#democrats
#republicans
#midterms
Become A Member And Protect Our Work at http://www.timcast.com
Learn more about your ad choices. Visit megaphone.fm/adchoices
CNN data reporter says that Republicans are facing a record 80-year high in the polls, predicting a major blowout.
And the corporate press says, actually, that's a good thing.
Because they think it means they'll win in 2024.
I'm not so sure.
Joe Biden is out there saying the economy is facing a robust recovery, but gas in California has nearly hit $10 per gallon, and nationwide, we are at a new gas price record.
People can feel the pain.
The lies won't work.
In our next story, Texas Rep and a Florida Rep are seeking to make child drag shows illegal.
And in our last story, Trudeau's call for gun control backfires as people rush out to the stores and clean out handguns.
One store says almost their entire stock was depleted.
In the U.S., one Democrat is proposing a 1,000% tax on firearms, which probably won't fly.
If you liked the show, give us a good review and leave us five stars.
Share the show with your friends.
Now, let's get into that first story.
Everyone can see the writing on the wall.
What is going to come in the midterms, which are now only a few months away?
Data reporter Harry Enten said on CNN that this is the best position for Republicans in 80 years.
Here's the best part.
The Washington Post runs a column saying, yes, Democrats are going to get blown out in the midterms, but actually it's a good thing.
They go on to say that while many may not want to believe it, every poll can't be wrong, can it?
I love that that is their logic to explain why Republicans are going to sweep.
Because yes, every poll can be wrong.
We've seen it consistently over the past, what, eight years now?
The polls have been wrong.
Particularly bad in 2016 when nobody thought that Donald Trump was going to win.
And then in 2018, Well, that one was a little bit more to be expected.
2020, once again, the polls were wrong.
They're likely wrong again, but not the way the media thinks.
Right now, in the generic polling, the generic congressional polling, meaning, would you vote for Republican or Democrat regardless of who they are, Republicans are up around two and a half to three points.
If the polling is wrong and favors Democrats, then it seems Republicans may actually be up, I don't know, five to seven points.
Either way, it's the best position for Republicans in over 80 years.
So what can you expect from the corporate press and from the Democratic establishment?
Well, as I already mentioned, the Washington Post is saying, we're going to lose, but actually it's a good thing.
Well, their argument is, By losing the Senate and the House, they can pass the blame over the conflict and the crisis and the economy onto Republicans and say, Joe Biden's been jammed up and then use that to try and reclaim the House and the presidency in 2024.
Not a bad argument, but let's be real.
Republicans might not win in November.
I mean, you got a lot of people who are just sitting here looking at the polls being like, it's a done deal.
And we all know what happens when people get overly optimistic.
I mean, I remember what I was talking about in 2018 when I thought Republicans were going to win.
I'm not making that same mistake twice.
I don't know what's going to happen.
And the media lies.
For all we know, the media is putting out these polls to lull conservatives and libertarians into a false sense of security so that they eventually lose because they don't turn out.
Democrats are going to pull out all the stops.
Mark my words.
This is not going to be a walk in the park.
It's looking good.
But you better get out and vote.
And you better get out and vote in your primaries.
That's important.
The other thing we're seeing from the Democratic establishment is, oh and you'll love it, Joe Biden just saying that everything's better than ever.
I love this one.
Media narratives and Democrats trying to claim that actually the economy is doing really well.
Gas in some parts of California is nearly $10.
And we got advanced warning of this because gas stations started adding an extra digit in preparation for $10, $10 per gallon gasoline.
And now we're starting to see it just shy of $10.
So when Joe Biden comes out and says, we've got a robust economy.
Do you think regular people are so dumb they can't tell that they're struggling to afford food and gasoline?
And I gotta tell you, the reports now about the coming diesel shortage, this is gonna be, it's gonna be a massive implosion if the polls where they are now suggest a record blowout.
I don't think people understand what's to come.
Now, this could be bad for Republicans, because if you're in a Republican district and everything's getting bad, they might blame you.
But I think when they look at who's in control, Democrats, they're just generally going to blame Democrats.
And when there is a diesel shortage, I think there already is, but when it gets really, really bad, When the gas prices are through the roof, and they're wondering why it is that there's no food at their local grocery store or they can't drive their cars, you think it's bad now?
Wait until October.
It's gonna be absolutely brutal.
The fall harvest is expected to be miserable because there's no fertilizer.
Who are they gonna blame?
They're gonna blame Joe Biden.
Under Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin didn't invade.
Now, maybe it's not Joe Biden's fault, but he is a weak leader.
And many people are going to say, I don't know.
I don't care.
It's bad.
Give me the alternative.
So expect things to get particularly interesting right before the election.
But let's take a look at where we're currently at with this data.
We have a story from Breitbart talking about CNN's statements on the 80-year record, the best position for the GOP.
Before we get started, head over to TimCast.com and become a member to help support our work.
As a member, you will get access to exclusive segments from the TimCast IRL podcast Monday through Thursday at 11 p.m.
Not a family-friendly show.
We'll just call it Timcast After Dark and Uncensored.
Less swearing, a lot of interesting conversations that probably would get us banned on other platforms.
But, you know, maybe not, to be honest.
But it is interesting, and if you want to support us, it's greatly appreciated.
You will support us in hiring more journalists, which I think we're about to bring on another reporter.
We just hired Adrian Norman, who's awesome.
And you're also supporting our infrastructure.
We use Rumble because we want to get away from big tech Silicon Valley censorship, become more resilient, and support free speech.
Put your money where your mouth is, if you would like to.
Support TimCast and these other platforms as well.
But don't forget to smash that like button, subscribe to this channel right now, and share this clip, this video, wherever you can, because if everyone who watched shared this video right now, we would be bigger than CNN and MSNBC overnight.
Here's the story from Breitbart.
CNN's Enten polling shows GOP will take huge majority best position in over 80 years.
CNN senior data reporter Harry Enten said Monday on The Lead that Republicans will win a massive majority in the U.S.
House of Representatives in the November midterm elections.
Anchor Jake Tapper said, If you're a Republican running for re-election or trying to unseat a Democrat, things are looking pretty good, right?
Anton said, I would say they're looking very good from the historical context.
Basically, I took the best Republican positions on the generic congressional ballot at this point in the midterm cycle since 1938.
The generic ballot basically is, quote, would you vote for the generic Republican or generic Democrat in your district?
And guess what?
Since 1938, the Republican two-point lead on the generic congressional ballot is the best position for Republicans at this point in any midterm cycle in over 80 years.
It beats 2010 when Republicans were up one point.
It beats 2014, 2002, 1998 where Democrats led by a point.
And in all of those four prior examples that make this list of the top five, look at that.
Who won a majority?
It was the Republicans who won a majority.
He added, now of course the election is not being held tomorrow, and we'll see.
Sometimes history isn't always prologue.
But my estimate for the 2023 House makeup, if the election were held today,
which again it isn't, we still have five months, five months from tomorrow,
would be Republicans 236 seats to 241 seats, Democrats to 194 to 199.
That's based off of a formula of seat-to-seat race ratings from the Cook Political Report
and inside elections.
Tamper said, that is a stomping.
Or that would be a stomping.
Enten said, yes, it would.
It's five months away.
We don't know exactly how it will play out, but of course, Don't be surprised when the media and the democratic establishment begin claiming, it's not bad, it's not bad.
In fact, it's a good thing.
I love this meme because it just always happens.
First they say, it's not happening.
Then they say, okay, it is happening, but it's a good thing.
Right.
Fox News.
Washington Post column admits Democrats will get, quote, blown out in the midterms, but claims that's a good thing.
Column declares Biden will look like Abraham Lincoln compared to crazy GOP if Republicans win midterms.
Are you nuts?
Joe Biden is Buchanan.
Well, who knows how history will will tell this story, I got to be honest.
Fox News reports.
Even the Washington Post will admit the Democratic Party is in for a monumental loss during the upcoming midterm elections.
Though few probably expected the outlet's latest column to argue that losing badly in November might be the party's best political strategy going forward.
What?
Losing is the best way to win!
unidentified
Hey, it's Kimberly Fletcher here from Moms 4 America with some very exciting news.
Tucker Carlson is going on a nationwide tour this fall, and Moms 4 America has the exclusive VIP meet and greet experience for you.
Before each show, you can have the opportunity to meet Tucker Carlson in person.
These tickets are fully tax-deductible donations, so go to momsforamerica.us and get one of our very limited VIP meet-and-greet experiences with Tucker at any of the 15 cities on his first ever Coast to Coast tour.
Not only will you be supporting Moms for America in our mission to empower moms, promote liberty, and raise patriots, your tax-deductible donation secures you a full VIP experience with priority entrance and check-in, premium gold seating in the first five rows, access to a pre-show cocktail reception, an individual meet-and-greet, and photo with America's most famous conservative and our friend, Tucker Carlson.
Visit Moms4America.us today for more information and to secure your exclusive VIP meet and greet tickets.
I On June 6, The Washington Post contributing columnist Matt Bayh wrote the Democrats will lose the House and possibly the Senate, but that might be their best shot at retaining the White House in 2024.
Bayh began his column stating, If you're a Democrat looking for reasons to be hopeful about your electoral prospects, then I've got one of those classic good news, bad news scenarios for you.
The bad news is that your party is heading for a world of hurt in November.
Every poll can't be wrong.
I love this.
Look at this.
Why losing the midterms isn't the worst thing for Democrats.
Okay, they said isn't the worst thing, but I bet they changed the headline.
And he says every poll can't be wrong.
I love this because yes, they can!
And they were.
Consistently over the past several years, and increasingly wrong.
In 2020, Democrats did win the presidency.
They did win.
Technically, they won control of the Senate only because of the tiebreaker vote from Kamala Harris, and they won the House.
But there were safe blue districts that turned red, and the whole polling system was skewed in favor of Democrats.
Republicans ended up winning tremendously.
They did tremendously better than anyone thought.
Here's what he says to the Washington Post.
The good news is that getting blown out in 2022 may well be the only path you have to holding the White House in 2024.
Oh, it's like a Doctor Strange in Infinity War thing, you know, where he gives Thanos the Time Stone?
You know I love Marvel references, right?
unidentified
And then Thanos thinks he's gonna win, but then five years later they go back in time?
He goes on to say, I'm not saying the cost of Republican takeover in November won't be steep in the short run.
These aren't the conservative revolutionaries of 94 or even Tea Party types of 2010.
This is the mutant gene version of a Republican uprising, a full-on crazy-eyed dystopian movement of conspiracists and authoritarians.
I wonder, have you touched grass lately, Matt Bai?
Yo, I can't go outside in any major city without some people talking about Epstein and their conspiracy theories.
So I don't know where you live.
Brace yourself for no end of mindless investigations, assaults on the electoral system, and nativist proposals.
A virtual peach tree dish for paranoia as governance, to quote rep Marjorie Taylor Greene.
But everything we know about modern politics suggests the best way, maybe the only way, For a Democrat to be re-elected is to also be the last guy standing between the broad American electorate and a whole lot of Republican crazy.
Yes.
Yes.
Please keep taking this approach.
These people have lost the plot.
I'm sorry.
If there was a sane or rational assessment of the problem in this country, I would respect the argument.
But there isn't.
Their whole argument is culture war.
Republicans are crazy.
You Democrats are in power.
And what do we get?
Ladies and gentlemen, I give you Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez slamming her Democratic colleagues for avoiding gender-neutral term Latinx and says language shouldn't be about re-election prospects after fellow Bronx recs slammed rich progressives for using it.
Gender is fluid.
Language is fluid.
You don't have to make drama over it.
Latinx is used by only 2% of Hispanics who were polled.
Keep chasing this psychotic behavior.
You know why?
It's the economy, stupid.
And you know what?
Regular people don't care about this weird Marjorie Taylor Greene.
You know, it's funny.
I know a lot of people who think Marjorie Taylor Greene is plum nuts.
And they don't care about her.
They don't.
They literally don't.
I don't know what to tell you, man.
Have you gone outside and touched grass?
That's the meme, right?
Touch grass.
It's funny because I touch it basically every day because I live in the middle of nowhere.
We have too much grass!
So I go to these cities.
You know, I was talking to a friend recently, and they think Marjorie Taylor Greene's off her rocker.
Liberal.
And they were just like, I regret voting for Biden.
And I'm like, yeah, do you really?
Or do you just like, think it was bad because the economy's bad?
Everything's kind of bad right now.
So whether or not they think someone might be off their rocker doesn't change the fact that the leadership right now is broken.
So here's what Washington Post is saying.
Regular Americans staring down the barrel of $10 per gallon gasoline will be like, yeah, but I would rather not be able to drive or work and starve Yeah, sorry.
I don't think that's how it works.
In fact, I'd be willing to bet there's a bunch of people who are probably sitting in their lounge chairs going, Marjorie Taylor Greene may be crazy, but hopefully she fixes the economy.
Personally, I don't think she's nuts.
I think she's wrong.
You know, peach tree dish or whatever it is they're accusing her of because she's not as learned in terms of grammar and semantics as they are.
I certainly think she said things that are wrong, but I think Marjorie Taylor Greene is a populist right-wing individual who is just saying, I'm sick of the elites.
I'm sick of the establishment.
And that's what people are looking for.
Here we go.
This is it.
He's saying, you need Republican crazy so that people will vote for Joe Biden.
Okay.
Or whoever ends up running in 2024.
Let me tell you what they're saying.
Joe Biden.
from The Guardian. To avoid historic shellacking in the midterms, Biden is promoting a sunny view
of U.S. economy. Much of America does not seem to be buying the optimistic vision that Biden and his
team are selling. So the strategy from the establishment Democratic wing, from Joe Biden,
is that as people struggle to pay for gas, he says, everything's fine.
It's a Blame Vladimir Putin.
And they're like, bro, I can see you doing this.
Joe Biden, we can see you are leading this country.
Under Donald Trump, there was no war with Ukraine.
Well, here we are.
Now, I'll tell you why gas prices are so high.
It's really simple.
It's because the U.S.
is at war with Russia.
I know.
Not formally, but that's basically it.
NATO is supplying weapons.
Personnel.
Yeah, not directly, but citizens of NATO countries are volunteering to fight in Ukraine.
The U.S.
is providing intelligence for missile strikes.
Personnel for training outside of Ukraine.
Yeah, we're basically at war with Russia, which is going to strain your resources.
Wasn't the case under Trump.
So here we are.
As he celebrated the impressive May jobs report on Friday, Joe Biden went to great lengths to paint a rosy picture of the U.S.
economy.
While acknowledging the difficult reality of high prices caused by near-record high inflation, Biden pointed to the 390,000 jobs created last month to argue the U.S.
PBS says, Biden hails historically robust May jobs report as hiring remains strong.
Wonderful.
Keep saying it.
Just keep lying to people.
From ABC30.com, the most expensive gas in the U.S.
is at this California station at nearly $10 a gallon.
I mean, it's basically $10 a gallon.
Here you can see 4.9 gallons was $48.86.
Mendocino, California.
If you think gas prices are bad here in the Central Valley, be glad you're not filling up in Northern California.
Schlaffer's Auto Repair is selling regular gas for $9.60 for a gallon.
It's not the worst part.
If your car requires plus, $9.69.
If you need Supreme, $9.91.
Wow.
We actually have a vehicle here that we use for taking guests to and from hotels and airports, and it requires premium.
10 bucks!
Well, we're not using it now for a variety of reasons.
I think, you know, we're trying to focus on using electric vehicles because, yo, this is brutal.
I mean, right now, gas is around twice as much as it was like a year and a half ago.
The station's owner has previously said that her prices are so high because even though she gets her gas from Chevron, she's an independent and doesn't sell food or drinks to help make ends meet.
Meanwhile, the average price in Fresno is $6.14 a gallon.
I bring you, my friends, to the AAA national average of $4.91.
This is one of the reasons I tell you war is bad.
I've been telling you that war is bad for some time.
Joe Biden comes out and says, part of the reason, you know, is Vladimir Putin's fault.
Okay.
Well, when Joe Biden blames Vladimir Putin, he's only giving you half the story.
Joe Biden shut down Keystone.
Shutting down Keystone drives up prices.
You see, Keystone is part of a plan.
They say, if we build the Keystone pipeline to transfer, I think, you know, crude oil, then we can expect X supply to Y demand.
And that gives us our what's the average gas gonna cost over time.
When you shut down Keystone, you say we have X supply to Y demand, and now X is minus whatever Keystone would deliver.
Thus, if demand remains high, the prices will go up, speculators will buy, preparing for a harsh reality of shortages of gas and other crude oil products.
That's not the only thing he did.
He shut down oil and gas leases on federal lands.
There was some shutting down of gas leases in the Gulf.
Overregulation has resulted in oil companies saying, we're not interested in working in some of these areas.
Many people outright just blame Biden.
I'm not going to blame him for every single, you know, issue here.
But when he comes out and says, climate change and we got to do these things, and then he does, are you surprised?
The reality is this.
The New York Times reports, high California gas prices rattle Democrats ahead of midterms.
Quote, I don't hear anything about other national issues we're focusing on in Washington, a congressman said.
A driver put it succinctly, I'm really unhappy.
That's right.
Regular people are burned out on politics.
This is a CNN poll.
May 17th.
Most Americans are concerned about the U.S.
and burned out on politics.
They don't care about your insane issues.
They don't.
They care about gas prices.
Gas prices surpass $5 per gallon in 10 states and D.C.
The annual cost of gas for American families has increased $2,200.
So you want to talk about the economy, stupid?
Here you go.
Take a look at the M1 Money Stock.
I like to look at this, it's the money supply, and then when you see that major spike, followed by the second major spike, I just like to go, AHHHHH!
Here's the funny part.
From 1960, 1959, up until 2008, Very little expansion of the money supply system.
I mean, it triples, it quadruples.
It starts at 140, I think, what is it?
140 billions of dollars.
what is that, $140 billion, $140 billion, and then it goes up to around $1.4 trillion,
140 billion.
$1.6 trillion.
So 10 times in 50 years, the money supply has increased tenfold.
Then, from the financial crisis, it goes up from 1.6 trillion to 4 trillion.
In the span of 10 years, it doubles.
All right.
It's a little bit worse than it was.
You can see it's not that big of a sharp increase, but it is a sharp increase.
And then you get COVID.
From, what is this, March of 2020 into May of 2020, the money supply increases four times overnight.
Just overnight.
Now, many people said, yes, yes, Tim, but they changed reporting methods.
They turned checking accounts, saving accounts into checking accounts.
Yes, but look at May 2020 to today.
It has increased from $16 trillion to $20 trillion.
We've added another $4 trillion in two months.
$4 trillion.
That's crazy.
From 2010 to 2020, we only added 2?
2.6?
In 10 years?
In the span of 2 years, we jumped 4.
It's gonna be bad.
This is why inflation is through the roof.
We're now gonna feel the impact of supply shortages, diesel shortages.
The diesel shortages will make the supply shortages worse.
And this is what Americans care about.
Inflation and the economy top of mind for Americans heading into midterms.
The vast majority say those two issues are important in determining how they will cast their votes.
Well, duh!
What did anyone else expect?
CNN, I have no idea.
Chris Silliza, writing for CNN, says this is a disastrous economic number for Joe Biden and Democrats.
He says there are a lot of bad numbers kicking around the political world for Joe Biden and his party, but none may be worse than this one, minus 45.
That's Gallup Poll's most recent Economic Confidence Index number, which summarizes Americans' ratings of the current economic conditions and whether the economy is getting better or worse.
The index ranges from plus 100 The rating from May of minus 45 is the public's most negative view of the economy Gallup has measured since the end of the Great Recession in 2009.
The numbers inside Gallup's index provide more daunting news for Democrats.
Just 14% of Americans said that economic conditions in the U.S.
are excellent or good.
More than three times that number, 46, said economic conditions were poor, and 39% rated them as only fair.
That's even worse than where Gallup found things in April, when 1 in 5 Americans said the state of the economy was either excellent or good, while 42% said they were poor.
Gallup's survey is far from a one-off, and the latest polling from CNN released this last month.
Just 23% of Americans rated economic conditions as even somewhat good.
That's down drastically from the 37% who said the same in December 2021, and precipitously from the 54% who said the same in April 2021.
Overall, CNN's poll found that Americans' view of the economy are the worst they have been in a decade.
That's surprising to me.
You'd think they'd be the worst they've ever been.
Minus 45 is only the worst in a decade?
I suppose the Great Recession was really, really bad.
Now, I think they're desperately trying to pump the numbers.
They're trying to confuse everybody because they don't want to realize they've lost control.
I take a look at some of these news stories and I'm just like, man, they've really lost control of the narrative.
Hey guys, Josh Hammer here, the host of America on Trial with Josh Hammer, a podcast for the First Podcast Network.
Look, there are a lot of shows out there that are explaining the political news cycle, what's happening on the Hill, the this, the that.
There are no other shows that are cutting straight to the point when it comes to the unprecedented lawfare debilitating And affecting the 2024 presidential election.
We do all of that every single day right here on America on Trial with Josh Hammer.
Subscribe and download your episodes wherever you get your podcasts.
Gallup's latest numbers come out the same day that Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen acknowledged to CNN's Wolf Blitzer that she had made a mistake when she said in 2021 that the inflation only posed a small risk.
I think I was wrong then about the path that inflation would take.
There have been unanticipated and large shocks to the economy that have boosted energy and food prices and supplied bottlenecks that have affected our economy badly that I didn't, at the time, didn't fully understand, but we recognize that now.
You know, maybe.
I think when, um... Well, first of all, when I can do these videos a year ago and say, hey guys, food shortages are on the horizon, inflation is gonna be bad.
I'm just some dude complaining on the internet.
I read stories, I do some fact-checking, I'll read some of the literature and research, but I am not Janet Yellen.
It is not my job to be in charge of these things.
How did she not know?
I think it's funny when, you know, you have these high-profile individuals saying, no one could have predicted the inflation to this degree, and it's like, there's a meme where it's like, Joe, the janitor at my workplace predicted this.
Yeah.
Regular people who are paying attention could see it coming a mile away.
But we'll see.
We will see if this does translate come November.
CNN.
These vital signs are very, very bad.
New CNN poll contains rough news for Democrats.
I love using CNN for all this stuff, mind you.
I do it on purpose.
Because CNN is the establishment media outlet that's supposed to be defending the Democrats.
And they're coming out and saying it is apocalyptic.
But maybe that's the game.
They're gonna come out and they're gonna tell all the conservatives and they're gonna tell everybody.
To rile up Democrats today to go out and encourage people to vote.
To rile them up to counter the narrative and push back.
That's their game.
Oh wait, what's this?
From the AP.
U.S.
sees heightened extremist threat heading into the midterms.
Now maybe it's a legitimate story.
They're going to mention a looming Supreme Court decision on abortion, an increase of migrants at the U.S.-Mexico border, and the midterm elections are potential triggers for extremist violence over the next six months, the Department of Homeland Security said Tuesday.
The U.S.
was in a heightened threat environment already, and these factors may worsen the situation.
In the coming months, we expect the threat environment to become more dynamic as several high-profile events could be exploited to justify acts of violence against a range of possible targets.
In the latest attempt by the Homeland Security to draw attention to the threat posed by domestic extremism, a shift from alerts about an international terrorism, indeed the threats from overseas, blah blah blah blah blah, Domestic violent extremists, however, present the most pressing and potentially violent threat.
The agency said, citing, for example, the racist attack in which a white gunman in Buffalo shot a bunch of people.
The Bulletin, which is scheduled to expire November 30th, said calls for violence by domestic extremists directed at democratic institutions, candidates, and election workers will likely increase.
You know what?
I think they're right.
I mean, I've been saying civil war over and over again.
I don't know if, when, or how it will manifest, but it seems likely.
When there is extremism, people vote security.
I don't think this is going to help Democrats at all.
In fact, I think this is going to help Republicans.
When people start getting violent, a Democrat coming out and being like, yo, this hatred is bad!
That's not going to do anything.
When people get violent and scary, regular people are going to say, give me the police state, please.
Not today.
Perhaps that is the Democrats, and not the Republicans.
I don't know.
Perhaps they will try to say that the extremism is the Republican Party.
They've been doing that.
They've been claiming that this violent attacker was right-wing and all this stuff, even though he said he was authoritarian left, but he believed the Great Replacement I don't know if it'll work.
themselves have pushed, but that's the narrative they're trying to create. They want regular people
to view the Republicans as extreme, which brings me back to the first story from the Washington Post.
This is what they have. Getting Republicans to win so that they can say, look at all these crazy
people, you need to vote them out. I don't know if it'll work. You see, if Republicans get in
in the midterms, they may actually do things that will expose Democrats, may actually do
The investigations may make them look bad.
And they may actually bypass the filibuster, changing the rules and passing bills, or trying to, that do good things.
The issue is, with Joe Biden in office as president, he's going to block all of these bills.
So nothing will really get done.
There may be an attempt at a veto-proof majority, but they're not going to get it because Republicans cannot.
I mean, they could, I think, if there was a miracle.
I think it's possible to get to 60.
It might not be, actually.
It might be 57 or something.
Republicans just aren't going to be able to bypass a veto.
And thus, all that will really happen is things will be jammed up, nothing will change.
But if nothing changes, and Joe Biden is the president, then we are going to see a red wave in 2024 as well.
Donald Trump will likely win, in my opinion, but I'm not entirely sure.
I mean, look, we're years away from that election.
It's two years.
That's an eternity.
Five months is an eternity in an election.
All that really matters is that October, when the early votes begin, when the mail-in votes begin, And right before people go in for their walk-in votes.
Republicans probably aren't going to do what they need to do to win.
That's a fact.
But they may be lucky that regular people are so fed up with the failures of the current administration and the Democratic Party that they'll vote for anything.
I don't think the Republicans are the answer.
I think if we could get in a bunch of Libertarians, we'd actually see a positive impact.
There are many libertarians who run as Republicans knowing that's their only path to, you know, having a seat in Congress or in the federal government in general.
But we'll see.
This is going to be an interesting election cycle.
I would love to see a couple libertarian candidates in Congress to actually challenge conservatives and open the door for potential third parties.
In 2024, I'd like to see... We'll see.
Is Dave Smith going to be the guy?
He might be.
The Mises Caucus is dominating.
But in the end, I just think we're going to end up seeing a Republican win.
Maybe it's DeSantis, maybe it's Trump.
We're going to see a major sweep.
The Republican Party is going to control all three branches, plus the Supreme Court.
I should say all three branches, including the Supreme Court.
They're going to control both chambers of Congress, plus the executive branch, plus the Supreme Court.
So it should get particularly interesting what they do then.
I think they'd do nothing.
I think nothing will get done.
Nothing got done in 2016-18.
Donald Trump was accused of all this ridiculous garbage nonsense.
But this is why I wonder if it has to be Donald Trump who wins.
I don't think Ron DeSantis would clean house.
I think Ron DeSantis is doing a great job.
I think he would do a great job.
But he's probably just going to play ball to a certain degree and say, look, let me fix some of this stuff and let me make some policies and I won't get in your way.
Donald Trump is going to go in and scorched earth the federal government.
He's going to fire.
He's going to terminate.
He's going to shut things down.
And that's what we need to happen.
It is an eternity until now in November, so we shall see.
But Democrats certainly expect it.
The media expects it.
So again, we'll see.
Next segment's coming up at 8 p.m.
over at youtube.com slash TimCastIRL.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
The left could not help themselves.
When the right came out and said, hey, maybe you shouldn't have drag shows for children with a big neon sign saying it's not gonna lick itself, the left had no choice but to defend it.
I mean, in all honesty, they had every choice to just be like, yeah, okay, we think that's nuts too, but they didn't.
Well, there are many leftists who are saying it's a bad thing.
But most of the prominent left-wing personalities and media outlets are defending lewd sexual activity for children, saying, but it was family-friendly.
Yeah, because they're pedos, they think it's family-friendly.
It's not family-friendly.
And I'd be willing to bet a large sum of money most families would probably be shocked when they saw what was going on with these drag shows for kids.
The reality is most people don't know about them.
But, in proving why it is people have been flocking to Texas and Florida in droves, Texas and Florida now have representatives who are pushing bills to ban drag shows in front of minors.
Because apparently they weren't doing anything, people had to protest this stuff.
And sure enough, prominent left-wing voices are coming out and defending drag shows for children, saying it's just cosplay, it's just dress-up.
Meanwhile, children are stuffing dollar bills into the thongs of adult men, and there's a big sign saying it's not going to lick itself.
Alright, let this be the hill they choose to die on.
I'm not entirely convinced this will move the needle with most families anyway, because it's the economy, stupid.
Why are people moving to Texas and Florida?
Well, for the most part, it's the economy.
They destroyed the economy, and people don't want to live locked down in these cubicles in places that smell like sour milk.
People want to be able to live and enjoy themselves.
In Texas and Florida, you can pretty much do that.
That's the crazy thing, you know.
Out here where we're at in Maryland, I was complaining.
I shouldn't say complaining, but I was noting that there was like nobody at these shopping centers.
We went out on Saturday Memorial Day.
You think it's gonna be hustling and bustling with a three-day weekend.
Everything was completely empty.
It was Saturday at like 9 p.m.
and I was in a big shopping center.
Nobody around.
You go to Florida, you go to Texas, what do you see?
Everything seems to be fairly normal, like the pandemic almost never happened.
So people are moving there, and maybe that's what it is.
Maybe the people who are staying in these other places are locked down and doing nothing, and the people who have—many people have moved to Texas and Florida, making them hustling and bustling.
All right.
Well, we got a midterm election coming up.
The latest polls are shocking and terrifying for Democrats, and they decided, you know what?
Let's make it worse.
We have this story from MySanAntonio.com.
Texas Rep Brian Slatton to file bill to ban drag shows in front of minors.
Now, you may have missed this story yesterday, so before we get into everything, I'd like to show you exactly what this is all about.
And we have this tweet from Derek Brunson of USC, taking umbrage with kids attending Pride Month drag show at Gay Bar.
Derek Brunson says he has no problem with gay people, but the UFC middleweight did have a problem with children attending a drag show at a gay nightclub over the weekend.
The event, held at Mr. Mister in Dallas, was promoted as a Drag the Kids to Pride and was meant as a celebration of people being themselves to kick off Pride Month.
The nightclub encouraged parents to bring their kids for a drag show Saturday morning.
Yeah, it's a, uh, I'm pretty sure a 21 and up only venue that did a special morning thing to allow children in.
Video online showed drag queens taking dollar bills from kids' hands while dancing on a makeshift runway beneath a
pink neon sign that reads, It's Not Gonna Lick Itself.
Kids also danced alongside drag queens while their parents looked on.
It's Not Gonna Lick Itself.
You know, we talked about this quite a bit the other day.
There is a video, I'm sorry, there's a photo that went viral a while ago.
And let me just tell you.
It shows, I think, a nine-year-old little boy standing next to a naked adult man and touching his arm.
The little boy is called Queen Lactatia.
Lactatia.
Lactate.
We get it.
These people are grooming these children, okay?
Let's talk about the law.
Let's talk about where this goes in November and what Derek Brunson said.
You know, he said, this is a bit much.
Children at a provocative drag show.
Can we protect our children more in today's society?
Children don't need to be at strip clubs or any provocative show throwing money.
Shaken my effing head.
Read the message on the board in the background.
Yeah.
Alright.
I talked about this yesterday, but let me explain what grooming is.
Grooming is when you bring a child to an event that is not necessarily overt in terms of the sexual activities.
Grooming is how you get someone into these cultures, into this behavior.
So, in this instance, the idea is, have a bunch of adults dance.
Tell the families, it's family-friendly!
But, when these parents come in thinking it's just a pride event, and there's a big sign saying it's not gonna lick itself, well those parents are met with a challenging circumstance.
Call it out and say, this is too much, I did not agree to this, but then you're a bigot, or sit there and have your children be groomed by pedophiles.
And that's what they did.
They had their children, they chose for their children to sit down and be groomed by pedophiles.
Because these parents are pathetic, well, and they're okay with their children being groomed.
I'm gonna say it again.
When adults do sexualized dancing, for children and then have them give them money as if it's
a strip performance.
And they put a big sign up or the sign was already there saying it's not going to lick itself,
which is a reference to adult activities. They're pedophiles.
I mean, that's it.
Now, you can talk about, well, are they actually abusing the kids?
Don't know, don't care.
This is what grooming is.
And if you are grooming kids for sexual activities, normalizing sexual activities for children, you're grooming them, you're a pedophile.
Period.
I'm not going to entertain these ridiculous and psychotic arguments.
Here is Matt Binder.
Matt, how's it going, man?
We had him on the show.
I thought it was a good show.
I don't think Matt was able to suss out any of his ideas, and he just kept asking, he just kept repeating the questions back at me, but I appreciate, genuinely, that Matt came on the show, at least as an attempt, because many on the left don't do it.
Matt tweets, quote, ban gender and LGBTQ discussions in schools because it is up to parents to decide when and how to bring these issues up to the children.
Then he puts asterisks.
Parents decide to take kids to a family-friendly drag show during Pride.
Quote, not like that.
You see?
Let them die on the sill.
Matt, family-friendly?
You're a pedophile.
I'm not here to mince words, bro.
If you think it is family-friendly to tell children it's not gonna lick itself, you're a pedophile.
That for me is like the line, right?
If the event was just in public, like it was outside on a stage, Or at a traditional all-ages venue, and there were people in costumes, and they were adults, and they were dancing and doing silly things, I'd be like, not my cup of tea, not a fan of that, but that is just performances.
Now, if it's burlesque, now you're crossing the line.
You're standing, you're getting into the activity, you're getting to overtly sexualized activities, and bringing kids there, now you got an issue.
Typically, I don't think you'd do burlesque at an all-ages venue.
You see where the line is?
When you bring kids to a 21 and up club that does a special event for children with a sign saying it's not going to lick itself, and then you try to obfuscate what's going on because you're trying to groom children, or you are defending the grooming of children, okay, let's say this, Matt, you are pedo-adjacent.
Is that it?
Or, I don't know, maybe he's just a pedo.
Here's the point.
You do not get to come out and say, no, no, I'm not, I'm not, when you're like, it's family friendly to tell children it's not going to lick itself, okay?
If you want to defend that, that's fine.
Me, I think you've crossed the line into telling, look, Matt, let me explain this to you, all right?
If you end up seeing this, let me explain.
They are telling children to perform activities on them that's what that phrase means that that's literally it's not gonna look itself is telling someone to perform an activity on them having children sit there and look at that and dance with them underneath that sign is
Effectively telling children to engage in these activities.
If you want to bring kids around, a big neon sign telling them to engage in Adult activities, because I'm trying to keep this one family-friendly, then I think you're probably a pedophile.
You want to respond to that?
If you want to defend that, by all means, but here we go.
We got Rep.
Anthony Sabatini.
He says, drag sex shows aimed at children have come to Florida. I will be proposing legislation
to charge with a felony and terminate the parental rights of any adult who brings a
child to these perverted sex shows aimed at Florida kids.
When will the sexualization of children stop? And we have this all events in pride on the
block drag show for kids.
So there is a challenge and there is a line and there is no easy way to place that line.
Let me explain.
As I mentioned before, if there were people in costumes, like a man dressed as a woman, dancing in public, Where's the line?
If they're fully clothed, like, there are drag shows where they're wearing dresses.
If that's the line, then you're getting, you still have the element of grooming, but it's not as overt.
And this is the challenge.
If there is an adult man wearing a dress, and he dances in a park for a bunch of families, should that be illegal?
Maybe you say it depends on what he's wearing, it depends on the type of dancing the person is doing.
These are real challenges, because there is no point at which you say the grooming is not occurring, right?
If a person puts on a drag show, and it is overtly family-friendly, like out in a park, and they're wearing a big ball gown dress, and they're twirling like a fairy godmother or something, and that's all it is.
You can say, well, they're not sexualizing it.
They're not having kids involved.
They're not taking money.
It's just like a costume show, right?
But it's a drag show.
So what happens next?
They then say, come to the next drag show.
The next drag show might have someone wearing more lewd clothing or more lewd dancing.
Then they say, come to the next drag show.
That show may involve someone who's pulling the kids up on stage and then ultimately you get to the it's not gonna lick itself.
That's the issue.
The first drag show might just be a single person in a dress.
But then they say, see, that was good, right?
That was fine.
That was family-friendly.
Come to the next one.
And they increment it up until eventually you're telling children it's not going to lick itself.
That is literally grooming.
But what do you do?
Is it going to be made illegal for a person to wear a costume and dance without sexualized dancing?
No dropping it low.
No lewd outfits.
No taking money.
None of that.
Therein lies the challenge.
Where is the line?
Well, I think it's fair to say.
You're going to have to have parents to intervene.
I think if it is just a person wearing a costume and dancing, that's fine.
And then you have the issue of figuring out where we draw the line.
That old saying, like, what is porn?
Well, you know it when you see it.
Not a good enough answer.
But perhaps when they put up a big sign saying it's not going to lick itself, and they have kids stick money in the, you know, the drawers of these individuals dancing, or hand them money, you've now basically become a child strip club.
What you need to understand, as I've mentioned many times, strip clubs are not, not always people getting naked.
There are many strip clubs where they can't legally get naked.
And people go to these events where women wearing full clothing will be spinning on poles and dancing and crawling up to men and taking cash.
That is still a strip club.
It is the same culture and it, it is, you know, walking towards something more serious.
I say this.
Let the left keep defending it.
The Republicans absolutely should be filing this legislation, because the left will then come out, like Matt Binder did, because they're reactive.
You know, I love the phrase reactionary, but this is all the left does.
I have principles, right?
So what I'm trying to do here is break down liberty versus abuse.
That's what I try to do when we have these conversations.
Where is that line?
We do the same thing with abortion.
Where is the moral and ethical line to maximize individual's freedoms and learn to live together?
What the left tends to do is reactively just defend whatever it is they're doing.
Siwon had pointed this out yesterday.
I noted this.
When she said, stop being scared to call this out because you might be called a reactionary.
Yeah.
Reactionary is a phrase that references the French Revolution.
It's those who reacted to the revolution and were defending the monarchy, blah, blah, blah.
These leftists are worried that if they say, hey, you shouldn't tell children it's not going to lick itself, they're going to be called right-wing.
And they will be!
Isn't that fascinating?
What makes someone left or right these days?
You know what, man?
Don't know.
I just think, I just think these people are losing their minds.
The Babylon Bee article you may be familiar with.
It said, Ingenious move, Donald Trump embraces impeachment, forcing the left to oppose.
Because the idea for the longest time has been, if the right is in favor of it, the left must be opposed to it.
Now, the right certainly does this sometimes as well.
The left will come out with something, and the right will be like, no, we disagree with that!
And I'm like, that's dumb.
Like, that's, like, just, dude, have principles.
But it's the exception versus the rule argument, right?
On the right, it is the exception when they do that.
On the left, it's the rule.
The left just seems to be like, whatever the right says is bad!
We disagree with it.
Take a look.
The Daily News says Texas legislator proposes ban on kids watching drag shows but thinks gun control isn't necessary.
The Bailey is, they're coming out and they're saying, it's just a costume party for children!
It's just, it's just a costume party.
And then, so that's what they're trying to say.
And then, well, I'm probably getting this one wrong, but the general idea of the Mountain Bailey is, and I'm sorry, I'm sorry.
I have it backwards.
The Bailey is when they would be saying, it's not gonna lick itself.
And they say, you know, they present the most extreme arguments.
Kids should be stripping on stage like they did with Desmond is Amazing.
Queen Lactatia, both little boys, should be posing with nude adult men.
Oh, I'm sorry, he had a little tiny piece of cloth on his junk.
They do all of these things.
They say it's not going to lick itself.
They have little boys talking about doing drugs on camera and making snort references.
Then, when you come out and say, this is grooming, they retreat to the Mott, which is, it's just a costume party for children!
You're a bigot!
You're a homophobe!
That's what they do.
Mott and Bailey.
So here's another weird one.
It's like, Texas legislator proposes ban on kids watching drag shows but thinks gun control isn't necessary.
What do these things have to do with each other?
They say, drag shows are no place for a child, East Texas Republican tweeted.
He was apparently triggered by a weekend show in Dallas, a Dallas bar, titled Drag the Kids to Pride Drag Show, which was advertised as a family-friendly revelry, a spinoff of the venue's Champagne Drag Brunch, at which kids could dance on stage with performers.
Protesters showed up.
Blah, blah, blah.
It's disgusting.
Let's see.
Do they mention the It's Not Going to Lick Itself?
They're not.
They just go on to basically drag this guy.
Critics and LGBTQ advocates immediately pointed out the contrast between that and the response to the shootings in Uvalde.
Blah, blah, blah.
Where's the It's... Oh.
They're not mentioning it.
You see?
Because if they wrote this article and were actually honest about what was happening at that event, yeah, people would probably barf in their mouths a little bit.
There was a video a few years ago of a small child named Desmond is Amazing, and he's stripping on stage at a gay bar, 21 and up, for money.
It's a child strip show.
They use the word drag because it's a Mott & Bailey.
They have a child strip for adult men, and then when you call it, it's just a drag show, it's just a costume, he's just changing costumes.
Yes, ripping your clothing off and then thrusting on stage is just changing costumes.
Share that one.
Man, we showed this in the Members Only section on TimCast.com last night.
The nemesquinn, I think the child's name is, who is seen posing next to an almost fully nude adult man.
He's got a tiny piece of fabric over his genitals, but other than that, it's completely nude, and the child is touching him and smiling for the camera.
It is pedophilia.
It is child sexual grooming.
If you know the image, just whenever your parents or your friends say these things aren't happening, just show them that photo.
Or show them the articles defending that photo, saying right-wing outraged.
And then just be like, do you support this?
And then they'll probably say, Well, I don't support average.
That one's obviously bad.
And be like, okay, that's all I'm saying.
You can come out and say, I'm not here to tell you that every story from CNN is fake news.
A lot of them are.
You don't have to believe me.
How about we start with this?
What do we agree on?
Show them that photo.
Show them that story.
Show them that it's not gonna lick itself and say, okay, it's not gonna lick itself.
Do you agree that crosses the line?
Okay, can we start there and say, that's bad?
Would you then be willing to look at this other video of Desmond stripping and say, maybe little boys shouldn't be removing their clothing for money on stage at a 21 and up gay bar?
I gotta tell you this.
If your friends and family, for tribal reasons or otherwise, look at this and say, I think that's fine, then I don't know what to tell you.
But your friends and your parents are pedophiles.
Now, they can argue that's not true, and they're going to.
They're going to say, oh, Tim's accusing them of being pedos, blah, blah, blah.
Yo.
Conservatives drew that line a long time ago.
Conservatives drew the line at calling these people pedophiles a long time ago.
I'm only saying that when you have children handing money to men who are doing sex dances under a sign saying it's not going to lick itself, they're pedophiles.
For me, that's where I'm like, okay, that's overt.
That's overt.
For the men who are handing a child money who's stripping on stage, they're pedophiles.
I got no problem saying that.
Conservatives said a long time ago that teaching LGBTQ sex ed made them pedos, and I was like, well, they're grooming them.
And I think a lot of these well-to-do liberals, they're in a cult, so they don't understand.
They're brainwashed.
This is overt.
Outright and obvious.
Okay.
So in Texas and in Florida, they're gonna make it illegal.
Good.
You know what?
Maybe... You'll have to legally define what a drag show is.
And it will probably have language saying like...
The removal of clothing, sexualized dancing, and things like that.
But it's going to be difficult.
You're going to have to codify exactly what you mean by this.
And they will do everything in their power to get around the law by just going by the bare minimum.
But okay, that's reverse grooming.
If you push them back saying that's the line you can't cross and they're forced back behind it, you are preventing the grooming.
And then you'll say, if you want to go into a park or an all-ages venue and wear costumes and dance, okay, fine.
If you want to remove clothing, sexualize dance, do sexualized dances, and have children give you money under a very obvious sexualized context, That's where you are breaking the law.
But you know what?
Let the left keep defending it.
And then when you tell your friends and family that these people on the left are losing it, and they don't believe you, just show them the left defending this and say, do you defend this?
But I'll tell you, there may be no help for the cult.
I know people who used to be in the safe, legal, and rare camp on abortion, who are now, a woman should be able to abort the baby at nine months, electively.
That's what Democrats have been arguing for.
Elective abortion at nine months.
Now, they always come back and say, that never happens, oh it never, okay!
I accept that.
I'm just saying, why are you trying to make it legal?
If the baby can survive, why kill it?
And I know people who are out like, well, it's a woman's choice.
And I'm like, it's the woman's choice if the baby can live.
The baby's like at eight and a half months and it can survive easily outside the womb with no help.
What's woman's choice?
That's what Matt was saying to us on the show when we asked Matt, should a woman have the right to choose to kill her baby at nine months?
He says, woman's choice.
Okay!
Yo, they will support anything if they think the cult tells them to support it, so fine.
This is the hill you guys get to die on.
I'm gonna sit back and be like, yo, I want nothing to do with that.
Make it illegal for all I care.
I'll leave it there.
Next segment's coming up at 1 p.m.
on this channel.
Thanks for hanging out, and I'll see you all then.
Justin Trudeau recently announced that he was going to freeze all gun sales, imports, buying, trades, etc.
And this plan, so far, has backfired.
All the stores were crazy.
Justin Trudeau's gun crackdown sparks handgun panic buying ahead of the freeze on sales.
Conspiracy theory time, my friends.
I think.
that all of these Democrat, leftists, Canadian liberal types, they're secretly very pro-gun.
Just hear me out. You see, they know that if they come out and feign wanting gun control
or proposing things that will never be made into law, they will create a boon for the gun industry.
That's right.
You see, Justin Trudeau, he's sitting there with his buddies who work at all the gun factories, and they're like, we need to increase sales.
And he's like, I'll come out with some insane gun control policy, and then everyone will buy guns.
I'm kidding, by the way, but that seems to be the result.
So, if I thought these people were smart, that's the only conclusion I could come to.
Considering I don't think these people are smart, then yes, they just keep doing things that blow up in their faces and backfire.
Now, Canada may pass this Bill C-21, and if you live in Canada, it means they're effectively banning handguns.
I mean, you can have one, but you can't make one, you can't import one, you can't sell, you can't transfer, you can't buy.
So what do you do to get one?
You don't.
If you have it, you can have it.
If you don't have it, too bad.
Whenever they say things like this, gun sales go through the roof.
So let's talk about what's happening in Canada.
Let's also talk about this House bill for a 1,000% tax on assault weapons.
In this context, when they say assault weapon, they mean literally every single gun except pump-action shotguns and revolvers.
And I guess technically a bunch of other, you know, not... Well, they're basically saying anything semi-auto.
So anything that's one trigger pull, one bullet, that's what they want to tax at a thousand percent.
Yeah, that will make crime substantially worse.
However, I gotta say the funny thing is, it's gonna make gun owners extremely wealthy.
Can I just point that out?
Imagine you're like, you go to the store and you buy a gun.
Then they pass this.
You just gained $5,000!
Not that I know if you'd be able to sell it to anybody.
But that gun's going to become extremely valuable.
Now, this is insane and unconstitutional, of course.
We've seen similar things with, like, the National Firearms Act, so we'll talk about that.
But let's talk about Justin Trudeau's failed attempts, or intentional, act of getting people to buy guns.
The Daily Mail reports gun stores across Canada are reporting booming business.
After Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that he was introducing a freeze on all new sales of handguns.
Trudeau on May 30th said he was introducing a national freeze on handgun ownership.
He added, in other words, it will no longer be possible to buy, sell, transfer, or import
handguns anywhere in Canada once this bill becomes law. The bill, C-21, needs to be passed
by the House of Commons and the Senate and is expected to become law by fall.
They think it will pass?
I mean, that's crazy.
Owners of gun stores are reporting a surge in sales, as customers who have obtained their licenses rush to buy guns before the law is enacted.
We thought there would be a bit of a run on handguns, but we didn't expect this, said J.R.
Cox, who owns and operates the Shooting Edge ranges in Calgary and Toronto.
All the stores in Calgary were just crazy, he told the Global News.
I watched a video after Justin Trudeau announced this, and it was of a man fighting a moose.
He's on a snowmobile up in the middle of nowhere Canada, and he gets attacked by a moose.
Now hey, the moose attacked him.
It's a sad video.
It is.
I don't like seeing anybody get injured or hurt by a weapon, alright?
Let alone a moose!
Granted, I have much less sympathy for the moose than I do a person, but you know, it's hard to say, right?
When you watch a video of a person who's intentionally trying to harm or kill another person, and someone defends themselves, you're like, good on them for defending themselves.
Same is true for the moose.
I feel bad for the moose because the moose is dumb.
But anyway, this guy's on a snowmobile.
And a moose is walking towards him and he's like, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, whoa, you know, like back up, back up.
And the moose runs up and does like a hoof thing, and then the dude still, he then pulls out his gun when the moose backs up, the moose starts going at him again, and then he fires once, the moose keeps running, he goes pop, pop, pop, pop, pop, he put that moose down!
It's kind of sad to see, you know?
But this is why people need weapons.
I watched another video.
This one was scary.
It's a guy in a forest.
And he's walking backwards saying, nice bear, nice bear, and there is a bear walking towards him.
Now, this dude is slowly walking backwards, and I believe it's a black bear, which is like, when it's a black bear, you gotta fight.
Fortunately, this dude had bear spray.
But I was just thinking, like, what would you do in that situation where the bear is desperate, starving, or angry?
So, you know, after a few minutes, the bear rushes him, he sprays a little bit of the bear spray, and the bear runs off.
Because the bear was just probably hungry, probably looking for scraps.
Didn't seem to be attacking the guy, but got dangerously close.
Imagine you are out, like half the country, in the middle, in rural areas, where there are wild animals.
And it's crazy when people are like, nobody needs an AR-15.
Good luck stopping a bear that's attacking you and your family with a handgun.
I suppose if you had like a desert eagle, you might do some damage, but I don't even know about that, to be honest.
I'm not a, look, I know, I know, I'm not an expert on this stuff, on guns.
And I'm not even convinced, I think a 5.56, like your typical standard AR-15, is gonna be able to save you from a bear.
Handgun, maybe not so much.
There was a story I read about a Grizzly, that when they finally found it dead, it had a whole bunch of like 45s and like 9mm rounds lodged in its skin.
Because these weapons don't, they're not particularly effective on bears.
It's crazy stuff, man.
Now anyway, I bring that up because Canada has a lot of rural area up north.
They're big animals.
Someone once said to me, how do they defend themselves from polar bears?
And I'm like, yo, I don't think that's an issue, to be completely honest.
Polar bears aren't coming down near the habitable areas of Canada.
Justin Trudeau tweeted, One Canadian killed by gun violence is one too many.
That's why we've banned 1,500 types of military-style assault firearms.
And that's why today, we've introduced legislation to further strengthen gun control in Canada.
Thread.
Yeah, these are evil people.
These are deeply evil people.
We know that gun laws don't stop the crime.
We know that putting up a sign saying no guns allowed doesn't stop criminals.
We know this.
It doesn't seem to change these things.
These people just want to disarm you.
Several gun stores in British Columbia province saw lines out the door within hours of Trudeau's announcement.
You get a lot of people that as soon as they announce new gun control measures, everyone wants to go in and buy a gun, said Dan Shemley, warehouse manager of Great Northern North Precision Canada, which sells firearms in Kelowna, BC.
Shemley told CBC's news show Daybreak South that handgun sales make up roughly 10-15% of the store's business.
But the store was now chaotic, with licensed firearm operators racing to get what's left in stock.
Other shops across Canada said they sold out within days.
Sales have been brisk, said Jen Levine, co-owner of that hunting store in a strip mall on the outskirts of the capital of Ottawa, nestled between a barber shop and a Chinese buffet restaurant.
Yeah, I think they know what they're doing.
I do believe the handgun sales are intentional.
in the last three days, since the prime minister announced the freeze, she said, showing off
her nearly empty handgun cabinet.
Yeah, I think they know what they're doing.
I do believe the handgun sales are intentional.
Here's what they do.
They announce it.
Everybody buys everything up.
Then they shut it down.
Because think about what would happen if they announced the legislation as they were passing it.
What are these gun stores gonna do with a bunch of guns they can't sell?
It would destroy their businesses.
So, they want everyone to buy them first.
Well, let's take a look at what's happening here in the United States!
House bill for 1,000% tax on assault weapons to be filibuster-proof.
Beyer.
Deeply unconstitutional, in my opinion, but they may try and pull this off.
Representative Donald Beyer, a Virginia Democrat, is seeking to introduce a 1,000% tax on assault weapons?
Oh man, don't you just love it?
Okay, let's talk about that.
You want to use assault weapon as close as it can possibly use the actual term assault rifle?
Fine.
They're already banned under the NFA.
Basically, you need a tax stamp, fingerprinting, and they've already done this.
But when they say assault weapon now, they're spitting in your face and laughing at you because their definition of assault weapon is standard handgun.
Glock 17.
You know the standard issue weapon used by police officers?
Just a pistol, right?
It's as standard as they come.
It's very common.
That's an assault weapon to these people.
They say they would do it through reconciliation that would not require any Republican votes.
The congressman said the bill is meant to discourage Americans from buying deadly weapons that have been used in frequent mass shootings across the country.
In the past three weeks alone, shootings in New York, California, Texas, and Oklahoma have left dozens of adults and children dead.
Yeah, and the majority of mass shootings are handguns, and they're in Democrat cities.
So these Democrat cities are being raised by their own failed policies and failed leadership.
So they want to come to you, good sir, who lives in, I don't know, West Virginia, and take away your guns.
What it's intended to do is provide another creative pathway to actually make some sensible gun control happen.
Bayer told Insider in an article published Sunday while discussing his proposal.
We think that a 1,000 percent fee on assault weapons is just the kind of restrictive measure
that creates enough fiscal impact to qualify for reconciliation.
Reconciliation is a tactic that can allow laws to bypass the Senate's filibuster.
Under this process, a law can pass to the simple majority, so long as every Democratic lawmaker supports it.
Democrats used this strategy last year to approve a COVID-19 relief package and the House-approved Build Back Better bill.
One expert told Insider that buyer's measure could meet the threshold of bypassing the filibuster because taxes get more deference in budget reconciliation than other policies from a parliamentarian point of view.
However, the bill would still likely face significant hurdles, even among Democrats.
Multiple lawmakers have previously proposed tax hikes on guns and ammunition in an attempt to drive down sales, but have been unsuccessful.
Bayer's proposal also marks a much more significant tax increase than Democrats have targeted in the past.
The bill would only focus on assault weapons, such as AR-15s, but would not include a tax increase on bullets.
However, any high-capacity magazines that can carry more than 10 rounds of ammunition would be aggressively targeted, according to Insider.
Full stop!
Once again, the media is trying to trick you.
I want you to understand this.
For those that don't have guns, and for those that have friends and family who ask about this, this is Newsweek spitting in your face, and then telling you, no, that's fine.
That's normal.
We always do this.
They're pissing on you and telling you it's raining.
The Glock 17.
The magazine that fits into that, not an extended mag, a regular Glock 17 rounds, 9mm, 17.
That is more than 10.
They are saying that that weapon would be an assault weapon.
When you go to the store and you get this weapon, stock, it holds 17 rounds.
Now, you can get extended magazines for these weapons.
I have one, and it's like a really long- in West Virginia, of course.
For some reason, people think that just because we do work in the tri-state, like, we're not in West- No, we're not- All my stuff is in West Virginia.
Everything is legal.
We have larger magazines for handguns where it actually sticks out a bit further than normal.
As for an AR-15, chambered in 5.56, 30 rounds is standard.
Standard.
10 is tiny.
And all these weapons come with 30.
That's what they're built for.
So when they say high capacity, they are tricking you.
AR-15, by all means, they can say, we want to reduce standard capacity to 10 rounds.
Fine!
But they're lying when they say high capacity.
They say, AR-15 style guns can range in price from $500 to $1,000.
I recently bought an AR-15 and it was like $2,000.
It's very, very nice.
Very nice one.
Meaning that a 1,000% tax increase could add $5,000 to $10,000.
Yeah, if you get a really nice, I think was it the Daniel Defense one was like $1,800.
So you're talking about adding $18,000 to the price.
Only rich people will be armed.
I mean, that's the way they've wanted to go for some time, right?
Nancy Pelosi can have armed security detail, but you can't have any guns.
There's nothing magical about that thousand percent number.
It's severe enough to actually inhibit and restrict sales, but also successful enough that it's not seen as an absolute ban.
Yes, it is.
There's no way a working-class person will be able to buy a gun.
You can get, I don't know, a .38 Special Revolver.
Maybe for a couple hundred bucks.
Oh, now it's gonna cost you $2,500.
Yeah, no gun for you.
Fortunately, good people are advancing and developing 3D printed guns to prevent despots and tyrants from spitting in your face.
Well, they can still spit in your face, but you will be able to leave, wipe the spit off, and say, I can do this at home.
Now Joe Biden wants to ban ghost guns and 3D printed guns.
You can't!
You can make a 3D printed gun illegal, but you ain't stopping someone from making one.
It's just not possible.
3D printers cost a couple hundred bucks.
And you can make a 3D printed gun.
His proposal comes as Democrats and Republicans continue to spar for legislation.
Blah, blah, blah, blah, blah.
Okay, okay.
Look at this.
An earlier version of this article misstated the potential price increase from the proposed tax.
How much more carnage are we willing to accept?
How many more innocent American lives must be taken before we say enough?
Enough, the president said in an impassioned speech.
It's time to act for the children we've lost.
They know they're lying to you.
They do.
Let me make it simple.
All of these crimes that are being committed are being committed by people who are doing things that are, uh, they're legally buying weapons, they're getting background checks, they're finding money somehow, and then they're committing a crime.
For some reason, putting up a sign saying gun-free zone hasn't stopped these people from walking past it with guns!
We were talking the other day about a meme video, where it's two MS-13 gang members, and one person's like, you know, uh, hey, do you wanna go, uh, you know, do that gang shootout?
And he's like, no, I didn't get my gun permit yet.
These people are getting guns illegally.
And there is nothing you can do to stop it.
I mean, let's be real.
The US government is giving guns to a lot of these people, you know.
Well, over in New York, stronger gun control measure into law.
It's really amazing that this Kathy Hochul, whatever her name is, is not even an elected representative.
That's what's really creepy.
She's just there, signing away, taking away your rights.
The state raised the age Monday from 18 to 21 for people to buy semi-automatic weapons, and bolstered the reporting requirements.
That means, like, a Ruger 10-22.
10-22 bullets are small.
They're dangerous.
Yeah, sorry.
You're 18 years old, you can vote, you can join the military, but you can't own a weapon.
Absolutely insane.
The bills approved by the legislature last week make up the most sweeping package in the nation.
In the wake of the shooting that's blah blah blah blah blah.
Yeah, they try and take you by the back of the head and smash your face into the ground and say, feel that pain?
So you go, yes, yes, it's bad.
They want to rip out your heart.
They want to punch you in the gut and make you look at these news stories where, of course, people are emotionally stricken, and then use that anger, that panic, that fear, that guilt to make you give up your rights.
They say, look what this one criminal did.
You don't deserve human rights.
That's what they say to you.
These people are genuinely evil.
Here's what I really love.
VP of Brady United Gun Control Group says GOP will be rewarded at polls if it votes for safety legislation.
Safety legislation!
Ladies and gentlemen, gun control is losing.
Gun rights are being expanded.
Now in many states, gun control advocates are getting what they want, but nationwide... Here's what I'm waiting for.
Right now the Supreme Court has before it a case, I believe they haven't ruled on it yet, about New York denying concealed carry permits.
I have a feeling that there's going to be a lawsuit over the 21 age increase, 21 years old.
But already, there's a court case.
In New York, if you want a concealed carry permit, you need to give a reason.
And no matter what your reason, they basically just deny you.
The same is true for Maryland and New Jersey.
Now, if you're rich and famous, you're usually allowed to get it.
Security guards are allowed to get limited capacity carry permits in Maryland, so you're allowed to bring it to and from work if you're a security guard.
Police obviously can carry.
Now, if you are a regular, let's say you're a woman in Maryland, and you have an abusive ex, and he threatens to kill you.
You go to the state and say, I need a concealed carry weapon.
And they'll say, why?
Oh, because someone threatened to kill me.
Too bad!
And they throw it in the garbage.
It is called a no-issue-in-practice state, even though they claim to be a may issue.
New York is similar.
New York City.
I believe it's New York City.
They'll say, what's your reason?
And no matter what you say, they say no.
If you're rich and famous and a celebrity, they'll be like, okay, okay, you know.
You're special.
We don't gotta worry about you.
You're famous.
The Supreme Court case could result in a broad ruling on nationwide constitutional carry.
Bring it on!
Supreme Court, do what's right and give us the broad ruling.
Strike down all of these unconstitutional gun laws.
At a state level.
We're looking at 25 states that are constitutional.
Kerry, Florida, has had to be the 26th.
If the Supreme Court issues a broad ruling and they say, any permitting of a person keeping and bearing arms is an infringement upon their right, that means everywhere you can keep and bear arms.
Concealed.
Now, I don't think they'll do it.
That's a lottery-winning, you know, scenario.
What'll likely happen, in my opinion, is a narrow ruling in favor of gun owners in New York, and they'll say that they'll issue something like, New York must create a path for concealed carry.
We saw something similar in Illinois a long time ago.
They banned guns, and then ultimately they were told, like, you can't do that.
It was, uh, I believe it was D.C.
versus Heller in 2008, where all of a sudden all these states were forced to comply and allow people to keep in bare arms, but they can still put a bunch of restrictions on how you get them and, you know, things like that, what the guns can have.
I want to see, in this Supreme Court ruling, a broad ruling that says, requiring a permit to carry a weapon is an infringement upon your right to keep in bare arms.
Then, in every state, you can carry your weapon.
I would like to see further.
You know what I'd like to see?
I'd like to see the Hail Mary absolute broad ruling of any legislation restricting accessories, magazine size, and concealment or requiring of permits is an infringement upon the right to keep and bear arms.
I just want to see them basically just abolish all gun control legislation.
That's not going to happen.
At the very least, I think what will happen is they'll say states must issue permits.
You can't deny people for arbitrary reasons.
And so this would force every state to become a shall issue.
So you'll still have to apply.
It'll still take you three months, but then you'll get your permit and you can carry.
What I'd like to see happen is constitutional carry.
This means the states will still be able to ban certain weapons, but you can carry them openly.
That, I think, would be best.
We'll see.
It's coming up soon.
This month, we should find out.
We've also got the Roe v. Wade thing coming, so that'll be fun.
